HomeMy WebLinkAboutInformal Minutes 04-27-2010BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
INFORMAL MEETING
Date: April 27, 2010
Convened: 1:30 p.m.
Adjourned: 3:10 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Chairman, Charles Grande, Chris Dzadovsky, Paula A. Lewis, Doug
Coward, Chris Craft
Others Present: Lee Ann Lowery, Asst. County Administrator, Dan McIntyre, County Attorney,
Mark Satterlee, Growth Management Director, Alan Gilbert, Chairman of Sustainability
Committee, Sandra Brogan, Oxbow Education Manager, Millie Delgado-Feliciano, Deputy Clerk
SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Mr. Gilbert addressed the recommendations as follows:
The Committee recommends that the County support an alternative energy forum in St.
Lucie Count. (Note: An alternative energy forum is being planned by the Environmental
Sustainability Alliance of the Research Coast and Indian River State College to be held on
May 25, 2010 at the Kight Center. There may be an opportunity to provide in-kind
support to the forum.)
2. The Committee recommends enhanced partnerships with Florida Power and Light's and
Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority's energy conservation programs, the energy and solar loan
fund, and green apprenticeship programs.
3. The Committee recommends that all local governments and utility providers do an
inventory of interior and exterior lighting on public rights of way and other public
properties and facilities. The Committee further recommends pursuing a joint RFP to
retrofit with energy efficient lighting (e.g. LED) to promote greater energy efficiency and
cost savings.
4. The Committee recommends approval of Resolution No. 10-115 to replace Resolution
No. 06-325.
Com. Dzadovsky asked if FPL and FPUA interacted with the thought process and if they
are open to work with the community on energy options.
The FPUA representative stated yes and this is indicated in the resolution.
Com. Coward stated we do not want to try to re-create the wheels that FPUA and FPL
are currently undertaking, but would try to work with the banks on the Solar Loan Fund
and also work with the utility companies.
The School Board member advised the Board their savings due to the efforts of the
energy efficiency committee has been outstanding. Their savings have been over a
million dollars a year and they will continue to do this so that they may continue to
receive rebates.
Com. Coward stated it would be wise to take formal action on these efforts.
A solicitation of interest letter from Chairman of the BOCC to Mr. Buscha from the RPC
and other entities on the Treasure Coast was recommended.
1
Com. Coward recommended a bonus category be included in the bid packets for re-
locations of companies to our area. He would like to keep this option open. He would
tike to start in St. Lucie County, make it successful and then expand it regionally.
Com. Craft stated he believes they should explore both and see who is interested he
does not believe they can define it today without input from others.
Com. Coward stated he believes St. Lucie County should make the monumental first
step before doing the entire region.
Com. Dzadovsky stated he felt if they could become a model first, polish it and then
move forward.
Com. Craft stated he wished to do what was right and believed having more people at
the table would be beneficial. He believes they should invite them to participate and
share the ideas.
Com. Dzadovsky stated he felt they could share thoughts, but the nuts and bolts should
start with St. Lucie County.
Com. Craft stated he would support what the majority of the Board recommended; he
was attempting to throw out his thoughts on the issue.
The Board thanked the committee members for their recommendations and all their
hard work.
SLCTV VIDEO AND MEDIA PRODUCTIONS
The Assistant County Administrator addressed the re-location of the SLCTV- Studio. She
advised the Board that at the May 26, 209 Informal Meeting, the Board has discussed
the renovation of the Community Services office. In the memorandum regarding this
agenda item, staff recommended the remaining balance of IFF funds ($434,035) be set
aside for relocating the Media Studio as well as renovation to the Chamber of
Commerce building.
Administration is requesting Board direction on proceeding with the relocation of the
SLCTV Studio from Morningside Library to Room 101 of the Administration building.
The following memorandum was received from the Technical Operations Manager on
June 24, 2000 regarding the relocation. The memorandum stated the following:
In an effort to improve productivity and to better utilize staff time, the Office of Media
Relations requests the relocation of our current studio facility from Morningside Library
in the City of Port St. Lucie to Room 101 in the County Administration Complex. This
office space was formerly occupied by the Parks and Recreation Department which is
now located at the Havert L. Fenn Center.
The current SLCTV studio has been an asset to the community, allowing staff to create
National award-winning local original programming in a controlled broadcast
environment. However, the staff time spent driving from the Administration Building to
the Morningside Library (approx. 15 miles each way) impacts our productivity. We need
all members of SLCTV staff, including the PIO, for studio productions. This equated to 4
staff members taking up 1 to 1 % hours for travel time. Even a 5 minute production in
the studio could cost us as much as $300 in staff time for travel, not including fuel and
vehicle costs. In most cases, staff spends a half day out of the office for scheduled
taping purposes.
2
In addition, when programming involves multiple guests, they cannot always be
scheduled for tapings at the same time or they may cancel and have to re-schedule,
further increasing the time and costs to the County. When the cost of travel time
for County Administration, Department Directors and other County staff, as well as
County Commissioners, is considered, there is a significant benefit to relocating the
Studio to the Administration Building.
Additionally, Morningside Studio is small, about 20'x20'. The ability to have multiple
sets require a complete breakdown of the current set and installation of a new set.
Room 101 will expand SLCTV's studio space to approximately 45'x45'. This increase
in size will give staff the opportunity to house multiple sets, allowing us to tape shows
without changing out the set. There is also room to provide a 20' green screen which
allows staff, with the right lighting application, to film individuals on an empty set and
then replace the background digitally with any imagery desired, a virtual set! Staff
would be able to tape more shows in less time with very little setup.
Currently, we do not have the ability to do any productions "live" on SLCN due to the
distance from our master control head end at the BOCC Chambers to Morningside
Library. By moving to the Administration Building, the cost of running a connection
from the BOCC Chambers to Room 101 would be minimal and allow us to broadcast
"live".
In conclusion, the benefits of relocating the current studio to Room 101 will include
time savings and cost savings. For example, the monthly 30 minute "Inside St. Lucie"
program takes staff approximately 4 hours (about $800 in staff time) to tape in the
current studio, including travel time. If we relocated, this time could be reduced to 30-
45 minutes (less than $200 in staff time) due to reduction in travel time, delays waiting
for guests to arrive and pre-production preparation time. Please note that Media
Services did consider the Havert L. Fenn Center as a potential location but the ceiling
height is not sufficient to accommodate the required equipment for a studio.
Budget for Invitation to Bid (if needed)
Lighting* $ 165,000
Electrical* 50,000
Engineering 20,000
Total $235,000
• Please note that due to the highly specialized nature of the installation, staff is not
recommending this project be performed through the apprenticeship program or
the Local Stimulus ordinance.
In-house budget includes:
Office Relocation $ 15,000
A/C 40,000
Total 55,000
Grand Total: $290,000
These costs represent one-time expenses for relocating and upgrading the studio.
Although staff is not in a position to project revenues, these expenses could b offset by
increased revenues from charges for production services and/or leasing the facility to
other governmental agencies and/or the private sector. The increased technological
3
capabilities by relocating will allow Media to generate revenue by leasing the facility to
outside production companies or agencies and/or hiring SLCTV for production services.
SLCTV has already been contacted by several groups for this purpose.
Please note the above total estimate does not include funding for additional equipment
upgrades that will improve productivity and quality of programming for SLCTV. Staff is
pursuing some of these funds through additional partnerships with the St. Lucie County
Sheriff's office, the City of Ft. Pierce, as well as others.
The Assistant County Attorney provided the following information as requested by the
County Attorney regarding the Non-Profit Use of SLCTV.
Per your request, I have researched the issue of whether the County can allow non-
profit organizations to use SLCTV to help promote their causes. Section 610.109, FS
(2008), stated that Public, Educational, and Government (PEG) Channels must be
"noncommercial." The word "noncommercial" is not defined, but would not likely
exclude giving free air time to non-profit organizations. There therefore does not
appear to be a statutory restriction against allowing non-profits time on SLCTV.
However, I spoke with Ila Feld, our outside attorney for telecommunications issues,
and she said that many local governments have considered this issue and decided
against allowing non-profits access to their PEG channels because of First Amendment
concerns. Ms. Feld cautioned that, once the County allows one non-profit to use SLCTV,
it must allow ALL non-profits to use the channel, regardless of the causes they support.
The County can only regulate on the basis of whether something is legally obscene, not
whether something could be offensive to the audience.
Com. Craft stated he does not support the relocation or the use of non-profits.
Com. Coward stated he too does not support non-profits utilizing SLCTV, especially
when taxpayer dollars are involved. He does however support the relocation.
Com. Dzadovsky stated he recalled direction being provided regarding considering
obtaining grants for non-profits to use the facility. He recalls asking for the grant
opportunity since then non-profits were not able to afford going to a private media
facility.
The SLCTV Manager advised the Board they have obtained a grant and the three non-
profit agencies from the 13 applications were: The United Way, Habitat for Humanity,
Division of Forestry and they are working with them to develop their public service
announcements.
Com. Lewis stated she believes that government does not need to get into the private
sector advertising and believes this was not their intention, she is comfortable with the
way they are presently handling it.
The SLCTV Manager stated they are not and will be doing any private advertising.
Com. Coward alluded to the memo from the County Attorney's office where it indicated
the opinion where if they said yes to one they would need to say yes to all. He believes
they should be very cautious per the legal assessment made.
Com. Dzadovsky stated they are talking about two different things, it's not about space
on public television, and it is about a video production used bynon-profits for fund
raising.
The Assistant County Administrator stated there is no interest in SLCTV competing with
the private sector for private production.
4
Com. Coward stated there seemed to be three issues:
First, Location and the Board has reached consensus on that item, second, staff
requesting clarification on the broader solicitation with the private sector and he
believes the Board is not in favor of that; and third, the grants and at this point it is too
soon to make a decision on that issue, but have a process in place when they can re-
evaluate the issue.
He would like to hold off and believes they need to give staff direction regarding the
solicitation.
Com. Dzadovsky addressed looking at the non-profits budgets as part of the criteria.
Com. Lewis stated she did not wish to look at what was budgeted for non-profits as part
of the criteria.
Com. Dzadovsky stated he believed the private sector would do this cheaper and they
do not wish to compete with the private sector.
Com. Grande stated he believed the direction as far as the grants they are not looking to
get into this until next year and will evaluate the results at the end of this year.
The SLCTV Manager stated they are considering renting the facility out.
Com. Grande asked where the difference would be in renting out the facility and not
competing with the private sector.
The SLCTV Manager stated he did not believe there was another facility capable of doing
this type of programming. All this would fall under the facility rental agreement where
they would have to pay for use of the facility.
The Assistant County Administrator stated they have received requests from other
government entities.
Com. Craft stated he did not have a problem with providing the service to other
governmental entity and charging them, he did have a problem competing with the
private sector.
Mr. Greg Gardner, SLC resident and licensed videographer, addressed the Board and
stated this should only go as far as someone wanting to use the facility. As far as the
non-profits, they came in the past to the private sector. The Castle has been a client of
private sector videographers. He stated the Vice Mayor of Port St. Lucie stated they
would never compete with the private sector. If he could bid for a project funded by the
State he would. There is not $200,000 worth of video production in St. Lucie County.
Com. Coward stated the City of Port St. Lucie does provide service for non-profits.
Councilwoman Barts stated she does a show on a monthly basis and invites two non-
profits to be on the show.
Mr. Gardner stated he would like to hear from the Board they are not going out to
compete against the private sector.
Fa a W. Outlaw -
From: espvideo@comcast.net
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 11:59 AM
Ta: Faye W. Outlaw
Subject: St. Lucie County video production
To Whom It May Concern:
It has been brought to my attention that St. Lucie County has procured equipment for the purposes of
soliciting private businesses for video production services. As a tax payer and licensed business owner (ESP
Video) in St. Lucie County for nearly 25 years I have objections as to this decision. I feel that my tax dollars are
literally being spent to put me out of business. Several years ago I lost business from another St. Lucie County
entity, WLX, who started videotaping the local high school graduations to sell for profit. Before this I had been
producing them for a great many years together with Ed Staten of Hightower Staten Photography, another local
licensed photographer in St. Lucie County. In times like these it is extremely difficult to keep my head above
water and with St. Lucie County working against me there is no question that my company will fail. The only
question is "how soon?". Please reconsider this action so that my company will continue to survive and I can
continue to pay taxes as a resident and licensed company in St. Lucie County.
Rusty Durham
ESP Video
111 West 1St Street
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
772-461-7417
Dear Ms. Outlaw,
h Ft Pierce Main Street
I'm writing in reference to a recane 19tindicated thatathe taxpayer funded and supported
Focus magazine. The article on p g
SLCTV Media Relations staff "is available for hire to produce high quality, award winning
commercials and/or promotional videos, either to air on television or on the web."
While this may seem enough, and possibly even sound like a good idea at first, a closer
look reveals that this is wrong on so many levels. As a licensed business owneI am a
video and media production business in St. Lucie County for the past 15 yeoin~ to fund a
DEEPLY CONCERNED about my tax dollars (or anyone else's for that matter) g g
competitive operation. Not only is it wrong, I'm quite sure there could be legal
ramifications as well. There certainly are ethical lines that have been crossed here.
Our local government should be implementing policies that encourage, protect, and nourish
established and startup local business entities. The idea of using taxpayer funded
equipment, operated by taxpayer funded personnel, to COMPETE with the very taxpayers that
provide that funding is unconscionable. I'm guessing the idea was to try to recover some
of the costs associated with the purchase of the extremely expensive equipment needed to
produce quality productions. This sounds good on the surface, but reveals a serious
conflict with the mission of our local government when viewed from a practical
perspective.
Not ONE of the video and media production companies in the county has the luxury of
having local taxpayers FUND both their equipment acquisitions AND their employee
payroll. The reality is, we are forced to try and forge a living from the minimal work
that does exist in the area for our craft, while constantly trying to figure out where
the money will come from for our next needed equipment acquisition to keep up with the
constantly changing technology. Few, if any of us have the luxury of fulltime employees
on staff either.
The SLCTV staff and department should be strictly dedicated to informing local residents
of the inner workings of the government, its meetings, and upcoming events and plans. It
is just plain wrong for SLCTV to compete ON ANY LEVEL with those of who have long been
established in this field of expertise AND who provide the very tax revenue used to fund
their operation.
While I'm sure the county's intentions where originally noble, I hope you now see that
this practice MUST be stopped. I encourage you to IMMEDIATELY cease any and all
practices that would compete with my business, or any other tax paying entity in this
county. There is simply too much at stake for me and my fellow video and media
production professionals to let this continue. Please know that unless this policy is
changed immediately, we will seek and use all possible means available to use to bring
light to this matter, including but not limited to local and national news organization
contacts. I'm sure in this economy there would be SUBSTANTIAL interest by news
organizations in any local government using taxpayer dollars to compete with its taxpayer
base. Government needs to know its limits. Competing against taxpayers with taxpayer
money is definitely crossing the line.
Thanks for your consideration, and I hope you will take this very seriously. Make no
mistake about it - WE (the local video and media production professionals) are taking
this VERY seriously, and will mobilize accordingly.
Sincerely,
Kerry Lehman, Owner
Bouncing Rock Media
2261 SW Haycraft Circle
Port St. Lucie, FL 39953
(772) 336-9121
2
10
Com. Grande stated the Main Street News was a misrepresentation of what their
intention is and they are taking the position they will not actively compete against the
private sector and are working very hard not to compete. The grant program will be
evaluated by the end of this year to determine if it will be done next year. The item on
the table is whether making our facility available to the videographers in the county if
needed.
Mr. Dean (unintelligible last name) stated while he worked at PSLTV 20, at no time were
they permitted to hire themselves out for video productions in any capacity. His job was
to notify the general public of things going on in the City of Port St. Lucie. The jobs in
the county are limited, so they try to do the best possible. He stated he had done a few
videos for the Castle. He believed having a studio available would be a good thing. He
knows Digital Domain will be coming in but private sector and Mom and Pop would not
be able to afford this so he supports a small studio in the area.
The letter was read and a-mail received from Rusty Durham, ESP Video and Kerry
Lehman, Bouncing Rock Media.
Com. Lewis stated once again there is a misconception of what the Board is attempting
to do.
Com. Dzadovsky stated he did not wish to go away from doing grants for non-profits and
they need to find the balance. The Board has come to the conclusion that they will not
compete with the private sector, however, he will continue to support the grants for the
non-profits.
CHARETTE FOR RESEARCH PARK AREA
The Growth Management Director addressed the Board and alluded to a memorandum
dated April 27, 2010 outlining the area around the Treasure Coast Education and
Research Park where the charrette will take place.
The following background was provided in the memorandum.
Providing neighborhood charrette services for specific area of the County has been a
stated priority of the Board of County Commissioners. The first of these priorities is to
perform a charrette for the area around the Treasure Coast Research and Education
Park. It is anticipated that as the Park develops there will be increased demand for
development along Kings Highway as well as the large tracts of undeveloped land
surrounding the Park.
It has been the position of the Board that the County must plan for and create a
development environment that is consistent and supportive of the Park rather than
allowing it to occur in a piecemeal or haphazard manner.
To that end, staff has initiated and completed the consultant selection process for the
provision of the charrette services. County staff has selected 3 consultants to sign
continuous service contracts to perform charrette planning services. The firms include
Ramon Trias/Kimley-Horn, the Iller Group and Calvin-Giordano. A consultant has not
been selected to perform the charrette for the area around the Research Park.
For discussion purposes, staff has attached a draft map that outlines the potential study
area for the charrette. This map has been attached to previous Interlocal agreements
the County had proposed to the City of Ft. Pierce.
Staff will be drafting a scope of services and selecting one of the consultants to initiate
the charrette project most likely this summer. In addition to ideas the Board may want
6
to include in the charrette scope, staff will require the selected consultant to address
the following scope of work:
A detailed description of the public participation and stakeholder process
that includes property and business owners of the study area along with
representative of the City of Ft. Pierce, TCERDA, USDA, IFAS and the School
Board.
A detailed process "roadmap" of the things such as the schedule, meetings
and Locations, needed data, logistics, information outreach, plan
development, plan format and deliverables along with details of plan
implementation.
To the extent possible, the inclusion of the County's green initiatives and
as well as a focus on sustainability; and
Achieving consensus on recommendations for the proposed land use and
development pattern that is consistent with supporting and enhancing
development within the Park based upon public input, Board direction and
sound planning principals.
Recommendation:
Board input and consensus on moving forward with the area around the
Treasure Coast Research and Education Park charrette.
The Growth Management Director provided a draft map on the area for the Board to
review. He advised the Board one of the consultants is local and they will be speaking
with them concerning the first charrette.
Com. Dzadovsky addressed the jobs corridor and if it had been limited to the Research
Park, he thought it included the Airport and the business park. He believed they had
talked about a jobs corridor in total.
Com. Craft stated they had not made the Airport as part of the discussion for the
charrette.
Com. Grande stated part of the discussion regarding the Research Park included Kings
Highway relating to this particular charrette and how far on Kings Highway they would
go and which type of facilities.
Com. Coward recommended receiving input from the Research Authority and the City of
Ft. Pierce before approving or finalizing what is before them today. There have been
discussions on broadening this between the TCERDA Director and landowners and it
could potentially change the shape of this. The intent has been that the park itself is a
major change in land use and they wanted to make sure they were re-evaluating the
transportation and land use around it and have it work from an infrastructure outlook.
The Growth Management Director stated he believes the area in between the interstate
and the turnpike would be a natural area to include in this to see if some evolution of
uses or types of uses in that corridor. He concurs with obtaining the City's input.
Com. Coward stated his hope is when they are done with this process they can identify a
long term plan that can be adopted by the County and the City. Ultimately they need to
have the City buy into it.
Com. Craft asked how much was budgeted for this.
The Growth Management Director stated they have enough funds and does not wish to
give out a figure due to negotiations upcoming. They have been carrying forward the
funds. At this point the area is about 3200 acres minus the park and there is about
1,000 acres of the park. Total about 4500 acres.
Com. Craft stated they may want to consider where the Jenkins Road corridor is coming
through this may help take traffic off of Kings Highway.
Com. Coward stated he would agree to this as a potential future intersection to look at;
however the question was, do they want more houses or jobs created through
industries.
Com. Craft asked how much of the area was undeveloped.
The Growth Management Director stated they would be doing an analysis of the area.
Com. Dzadovsky asked if the road way coming in encompasses the new proposed
entryway to take care of the issue of the entrance of the park.
The TCERDA Director stated the boundary was flexible and if they moved it east towards
95 it would capture more of the corridor association.
The Growth Management Director stated they were looking at going over to the
western edge of the Jenkins Road overlay district and he has the names of the people in
the corridor association that would be included in the private sector area.
It was the consensus of the Board to request input from the City of Ft. Pierce.
The Growth Management Director stated he would send a letter to the City Manager
and meet with him and give them an update and see if they wish to present it to the City
Commission.
Com. Craft stated he was not opposed to blocking out a segment going out to the
Airport because he believes it will be a benefit to the park in the future.
The Growth Management Director stated they may be able to do a subsequent
charrette and study in the future for that area.
The TCERDA Director stated the roadways and how it all fits together will be critical for
the Park and the Airport.
Com. Coward recommended making a distinction between the area they wish to focus
on land use planning and transportation which would be larger. He would like the land
use planning to drive the transportation not the transportation drive the land use.
The Growth Management Director asked if the Board had any specific issues they
wished to address i.e. get out of the concurrency box for example, water and sewer to
the Research Park, Kings Highway.
Com. Grande stated he believed they needed to have a discussion with the City of Ft.
Pierce due to the fact the Park is split between the service area of FPUA and the other
part in the county service area.
Com. Craft stated they would not be going to the other side of 95 so at this point there
would not be a reason for such a discussion.
Com. Coward stated it may be a discussion for the future.
8
The Chairman asked if there were any more questions.
The Growth Management Director stated he was looking for the Board's blessing to
move forward at a July time frame and believes the Board has given him direction
regarding the boundary and he would be meeting with the City of Ft. Pierce.
Com. Coward addressed a possible land swap of some sensitive land being held for a
county utility project.
Com. Craft stated he has already talked with the Utilities Director on this issue.
Com. Coward stated he would like to stop the process and take it off the agenda of the
Planning and Zoning meeting.
The Utilities Director stated she has a meeting scheduled with the City of Ft. Pierce.
Com. Coward requested stopping the process until they could have a better handle on
the situation.
There being no further items on the agenda to be heard or discussed, the meeting was
adjourned.
9